Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:

Password

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:

Confirm Password:

Email Address

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:

Insurance

Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

User Name

Remember Me?

Password

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Additional Options

Miscellaneous Options

Automatically parse links in text

Automatically embed media (requires automatic parsing of links in text to be on).

Automatically retrieve titles from external links

Topic Review (Newest First)

11-15-2012 09:29 PM

RunswScissors

Quote:

Originally Posted by topmeat69

when you say "On wagons, they definitely had stiffer rear springs AND a taller free height. " what do you mean? I installed wagon springs on 5 caprices and when the speings were out of the car sedan springs setting next to wagon springs, the sedans spring were much taller and the wagon springs weighted one pound more than the sedan springs.. thanks

Thicker wire in the spring (stiffer), which goes to rate. Wagon springs.are about 175#/in. The stiffest sedan spring offered was 150#/in, some as low as 125.
The sedans had a few different ride heights. 94-96 impalas were the lowest, regular sedans were trimmed have higher, and the ride height on the cop cars was the highest. Cop car and impala spring rates were both the same but the cop car free lengths were.longer so the car sat higher.

So to be more clear, wagon springs are definitely stiffer, but depending on what rear spring you compare them to, they may be shorter or longer. I have the factory spring chart somewhere, I'll have to see what the wagon free heights are.

11-15-2012 09:18 PM

RunswScissors

Quote:

Originally Posted by topmeat69

how are the brakes bigger ? Ive never heard that , I do have the factory service manuels for the 91 and 96 caprice. thanks

The caprice 9c1 got wider calipers to fit thicker pads. No improvement in braking but the.thicker pads gave a longer service interval betweennpad changes.. fleetwood brougham limo had the widest caliper, i think the rpo for that was J55, but I will have check my notes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by topmeat69

I had an 85 caprice , I installed wagon spindles and camaro LE1 rotors which kept the old small bolt pattern, the improved breaking power showed me the sedan brakes were way to small for a 4000 lb car.

Very common mod to these cars. The wagon spindles from the 80's are essentially what all 91-96 sedans and wagons, with the exception that the 91-96 knuckles have provisions for the abs sensors, if thats important to you.

11-15-2012 09:15 PM

topmeat69

taller free height springs ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunswScissors

If you ever want to do discs, 9c1/Impala SS rear brakes fit the sedan axles without mods. You can get the discs to fit the wagon, but it's just another step you'll need to take. I don't really see an advantage of a wagon axle over the sedan, they are largely the same aside from the LCA mounting further outboard on the axle, and the frame is wider in the back. I guess it depends on what car you are putting it under, and if you can see an advantage of the different track width and slightly different suspension.

I have done 3 B-car frame swaps, the most recent about 3 weeks ago. I put a 94 9c1 frame under my 79 Coupe. Reading the comments above, I did it because the new frame was a southern frame from AZ, was already repainted, and had a completely rebuilt front and rear suspension. Much nicer than the crusty frame I had under the car. It's not a ton of work, we did the swap in 8 hours, and I'll never have to touch the frame again.

You can do it with a hoist, or with some forethought, some stands made out of 2x6's and a Cherry picker.. did that twice...

Regarding 8.5" sedan axles, I redrilled the axles on one of my bare 9c1 units. The backing plates from an earlier car will fit, but the hub locator flange on the 91-96 axles is larger, so my stock 9" drums would not fit. You can get a 91-96 with 9" drums, so I did that and drilled the pattern to 5x4.75". You can do this on a drill press. I transfer punched the pattern from my redrilled axle shafts (which were done on a mill with very good accuracy), and drilled the holes to 1/2" The drum located on the center flange, and gets clamped to the axle by the wheel, so getting the bolt pattern perfect is not very critical.

FWIW, you need to be careful with which axle you use from 91-96, there are 7.5" axles on a lot of those cars, 94-96 is a safer bet, but even then some 4.3L V8 cars were 7.5. There are also 2-3 different widths. Log on to impalassforum.com, there are stickes in the driveline section that detail the widths.

Regarding springs, it's a mixed bag. The junkyard is your friend. The rates are not often that different, but the free height is, so it changes your ride height among sedans. On wagons, they definitely had stiffer rear springs AND a taller free height.

when you say "On wagons, they definitely had stiffer rear springs AND a taller free height. " what do you mean? I installed wagon springs on 5 caprices and when the speings were out of the car sedan springs setting next to wagon springs, the sedans spring were much taller and the wagon springs weighted one pound more than the sedan springs.. thanks

11-15-2012 09:03 PM

topmeat69

larger front rotors for caprice

Quote:

Originally Posted by ironindian77

I wondering if 91-96 caprice suspension parts and rearend will fit in my 85.because I'd like to put a 300 hp 350 in my 85 and I know the 7.5 won't last to long.I thought I read some were that the 91-96 caprice 8.5 rearends were a straight bolt in just they were a little wider.I was also wondering if the front and rear suspension parts would also fit.I'm trying to make a 85 caprice ss of sorts.

I had an 85 caprice , I installed wagon spindles and camaro LE1 rotors which kept the old small bolt pattern, the improved breaking power showed me the sedan brakes were way to small for a 4000 lb car.

11-15-2012 08:57 PM

topmeat69

bigger brakes on the 9C1 ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericnova72

True, unless the 91-96 frame is from the 9c1 police package, then it has stiffer springs, bigger anti-roll bars, higher durometer bushings, bigger front brakes. If I had the cop car, I'd probably do the complete frame swap,. If not, just a rear swap and then rebuild the suspension with poly bushings and add aftermarket anti-roll bars.

how are the brakes bigger ? Ive never heard that , I do have the factory service manuels for the 91 and 96 caprice. thanks

03-07-2012 05:50 AM

RunswScissors

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt's37Buick

I'm looking at buying a '94-'96 Roadmaster for a donor car. I plan on using the engine, trans, steer column, modified seats, and electrical. I'll would also try to use the front steer components to do a front suspension upgrade similar to http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/w...ension_upgrade. Not sure how well the parts will work yet because the lower arms are not symetric like my old Buick.
1) Assuming I can use the suspension, is there any advantage to buying a sedan or a wagon as a donor car?
Thanks

If you ever want to do discs, 9c1/Impala SS rear brakes fit the sedan axles without mods. You can get the discs to fit the wagon, but it's just another step you'll need to take. I don't really see an advantage of a wagon axle over the sedan, they are largely the same aside from the LCA mounting further outboard on the axle, and the frame is wider in the back. I guess it depends on what car you are putting it under, and if you can see an advantage of the different track width and slightly different suspension.

I have done 3 B-car frame swaps, the most recent about 3 weeks ago. I put a 94 9c1 frame under my 79 Coupe. Reading the comments above, I did it because the new frame was a southern frame from AZ, was already repainted, and had a completely rebuilt front and rear suspension. Much nicer than the crusty frame I had under the car. It's not a ton of work, we did the swap in 8 hours, and I'll never have to touch the frame again.

You can do it with a hoist, or with some forethought, some stands made out of 2x6's and a Cherry picker.. did that twice...

Regarding 8.5" sedan axles, I redrilled the axles on one of my bare 9c1 units. The backing plates from an earlier car will fit, but the hub locator flange on the 91-96 axles is larger, so my stock 9" drums would not fit. You can get a 91-96 with 9" drums, so I did that and drilled the pattern to 5x4.75". You can do this on a drill press. I transfer punched the pattern from my redrilled axle shafts (which were done on a mill with very good accuracy), and drilled the holes to 1/2" The drum located on the center flange, and gets clamped to the axle by the wheel, so getting the bolt pattern perfect is not very critical.

FWIW, you need to be careful with which axle you use from 91-96, there are 7.5" axles on a lot of those cars, 94-96 is a safer bet, but even then some 4.3L V8 cars were 7.5. There are also 2-3 different widths. Log on to impalassforum.com, there are stickes in the driveline section that detail the widths.

Regarding springs, it's a mixed bag. The junkyard is your friend. The rates are not often that different, but the free height is, so it changes your ride height among sedans. On wagons, they definitely had stiffer rear springs AND a taller free height.

02-29-2012 10:09 PM

Vetteman61

I did know at one time when I was researching all this but I've since forgotten it. This forum was pretty helpful in some areas: B Body Forum

You may also find some help at these sites if you ask around or look deep enough:

Sedans and wagons will have different rear suspensions and spring rates, which will cause the car you're putting these parts on to sit differently depending on which you get. You might also be concerned with gear ratios in the rear end.

Brandon

02-29-2012 02:28 PM

Mutt's37Buick

I'm looking at buying a '94-'96 Roadmaster for a donor car. I plan on using the engine, trans, steer column, modified seats, and electrical. I'll would also try to use the front steer components to do a front suspension upgrade similar to http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/w...ension_upgrade. Not sure how well the parts will work yet because the lower arms are not symetric like my old Buick.
1) Assuming I can use the suspension, is there any advantage to buying a sedan or a wagon as a donor car?
Thanks

01-28-2012 04:27 PM

stich626

take the newer 8.5 and pull the axles and have them redrilled for the 4.75x5
same with the rotors.

01-18-2012 07:21 PM

Vetteman61

My first car was a '78 Aerocoupe Caprice. I still have it. As mentioned, all the suspension parts from 77-96 interchange.

One thing you might find interesting is that some of the Buicks had an extra bar on the rear of the frame that gave it extra stability (maybe the station wagons too??).

Here's my car in front of our family dealership, before the Government tore it down in 2009. The federal government closed us up and coincidentally the local government (which had a council full of corrupt idiots, literally) planned to tear the building down and put a building there. The building had been there since the 20s.

01-17-2012 02:59 AM

topmeat69

Quote:

Originally Posted by ironindian77

I wondering if 91-96 caprice suspension parts and rearend will fit in my 85.because I'd like to put a 300 hp 350 in my 85 and I know the 7.5 won't last to long.I thought I read some were that the 91-96 caprice 8.5 rearends were a straight bolt in just they were a little wider.I was also wondering if the front and rear suspension parts would also fit.I'm trying to make a 85 caprice ss of sorts.

You can get the spindles off of the caprice wagon,it used the larger front disc,but the wagon had a 5 in bolt pattern, so you order the front disc for the LE1 racing camaro and it has the 4 3/4 in. bolt pattern they cost the same as regular disc, I did all of this to my 85 caprice 2 door,it made for a very cost effective improvement in braking

11-16-2010 01:03 PM

Michael T.

Consider the Caprice Wagon springs on the sedan

Quote:

Originally Posted by ironindian77

I wondering if 91-96 caprice suspension parts and rearend will fit in my 85.because I'd like to put a 300 hp 350 in my 85 and I know the 7.5 won't last to long.I thought I read some were that the 91-96 caprice 8.5 rearends were a straight bolt in just they were a little wider.I was also wondering if the front and rear suspension parts would also fit.I'm trying to make a 85 caprice ss of sorts.

I installed wagon springs on 3 sedans,83,85,91 and soon a 96.I feel the wagon springs are stiffer than what GM put on ANY sedan including the 9C1.The improved handling was GREAT,the cost is about $80. for 4 coil springs.And it makes for a much safer car.

10-15-2010 08:39 AM

joe_padavano

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericnova72

True, unless the 91-96 frame is from the 9c1 police package, then it has stiffer springs, bigger anti-roll bars, higher durometer bushings, bigger front brakes. If I had the cop car, I'd probably do the complete frame swap,. If not, just a rear swap and then rebuild the suspension with poly bushings and add aftermarket anti-roll bars.

And again, all of those pieces bolt into the 1977-1990 frame. I would much rather swap springs and sway bars than a whole frame, but hey, that's me. You only need to spin one cage nut on the body mounting bolts...

This thread has more than 15 replies.
Click here to review the whole thread.